Multiple examples

[ffissore]

This is a re-work of #3616
All commits made by @biggates were squashed into one commit, put on top of current master (= 3.9.0), and cleaned up so that npm test passed
3 additional commits were added to clean up the code a bit more, and to remove runtime errors

How Has This Been Tested?

We are about to deploy it to production, but no automatic tests were added

Types of changes

• No code changes (changes to documentation, CI, metadata, etc)
• Dependency changes (any modification to dependencies in package.json)
• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

Checklist:

• My code follows the code style of this project.
• My change requires a change to the documentation.
• I have updated the documentation accordingly.
• I have added tests to cover my changes.
• All new and existing tests passed.

[ffissore]

Removed dist files commit and rebased

[theangrydev]

When is this due to be released?

[heldersepu]

@theangrydev There are conflicts on this PR
Safe to assume that those have to be fixed before it will be considered...
Looking at the code changes it looks simple, once the conflicts are corrected it should move fast.

@ffissore consider adding some UnitTests

[ffissore]

I've rebased the PR. I'm sorry but I'm not a react dev: all the work has been done by @biggates, I just managed to clean up the code. I don't know where and how to add unit tests.

[JohneDoe]

why is it not merged?

[heldersepu]

Hey @JohneDoe if you have some time please add some UnitTests

[niklasnorin]

Can't wait for this to be merged!

[havwig]

Is there anything I can do to help this along?

[stbischof]

@havwig I think only UnitTests are needet and merging the new commits. For me its the wrong language. But I'm really interested in this Feature!

[webron]

See #3803 for related discussion.

[jwalton]

What unit tests does this need? Can I do something to help move this along?

[mika018]

Any chance of resolving the conflicts soon? Thanks

[ffissore]

Rebased once more, although likely to stop doing so as this PR didn't get enough traction.
Also please be aware that we are not using this latest version in production: we are still using its first release, based on swagger-ui 3.9.0 as stated in PR first comment

[ffissore]

If you know react, please add unit tests where appropriate. That will help this PR

[webron]

@ffissore conceptually, the PR is important to us. The main problem is with the UX and that's something we have to explore and verify before merging anything in. I'm hoping to get some people to help review the UX aspect in a few weeks - this is a bit more challenging than other changes to the UI.

[ffissore]

I totally understand your problem and your focus on UX: please keep up the good work. I'll try to keep this in sync with master

[AndyWendt]

This seems to work for multiple request body examples but it doesn't seem to include changes for multiple response examples.

Otherwise, we totally want this and I probably could spare a member of my team to work on this if it would be helpful.

👍

[theangrydev]

@AndyWendt I have seen it working with multiple examples for both request and response bodies. I built a snapshot and have a live example here:
https://trafficparrot.com/documentation/3.13.x/openapi/index.html

Have a look at one of the POST sections.

[AndyWendt]

Interesting @theangrydev, thanks for the insight. I must be doing something wrong then.

[AndyWendt]

Yep, I was. Improper indentation in the yaml file

[theangrydev]

All hail yaml! King of the whitespace!

[codedmonkey]

The activeTab value should also get updated when switching between content types in case they have different examples. Currently it fails to load a tab at all when this is the case because the current activeTab value's tab doesn't exist.

[racci]

@theangrydev @AndyWendt
I downloaded .yaml file from following page and run it in swagger editor
https://trafficparrot.com/documentation/3.13.x/openapi/index.html

However, I still not able to see multiple body examples.
Am I missing something?

[theangrydev]

@racci The fix has probably still not been released yet. I compiled my own version of swagger ui with a fix that worked for me.

[racci]

Ohh I see. Thanks @theangrydev

Do you have any estimate when it may release?

[razerware]

@theangrydev @racci i build my Swagger UI of V3.18 by Docker and I download .yaml from your snapshot. It seems mutli-examples still not work yet. I got same result as @racci.

[boesing]

Well, since I am working with this Pull Request for about a few months, I can tell you guys that this is actually working as expected.
I would appreciate, if this is being merged to the next version. If there are bugs, those still can be fixed in one of the next releases.

What can we do to bring this up?

[Javivi]

Any progress towards a release?

[webron]

We have an initial design to what it may end up looking like, but unfortunately no ETA yet.

[boesing]

@ffissore As this worked for me for about a year now, I would like to see this PR rebased against the latest changes so I can update and just re-apply your changes on the latest code.

This probably makes life easier for @webron to merge this after they finally decided how they want to style this feature.
(At least thats what I understood what he meant in his last comment: its still a question about style.)

Sad story that this cannot be merged until the day a final design comes up. I dont see any issue with this and would really love to see this merged. There should be no issue to change the mockup in another release tho.

[ffissore]

Apologies @boesing but in the meantime I've left the company so I don't have chances to rebase and test this PR

[boesing]

@ffissore the code changes are in your account? dont understand why you are not able to do this but whatever. I dont see any way to get this even merged then. Hopefully some can take your ideas to apply them in a proper feature in one of the next releases.
thanks anyway.

[shockey]

Closing in favor of #5427. Thanks for the efforts here, @ffissore!